/ *TER/FLost communications: aircraft squawks 7600 and controller
coordinates with the next controller.That's the easy part.The
hard part is remembering what the pilot will do in the event of lost
communications.With the
emphasis on national security and the implications of a pilot with lost
communications doing something we might not anticipate him/her doing,
now is a good time to review the regulations in the Aeronautical
Information Manual (AIM) and the Federal Aviation Administration Order (FAAO)
7110.65.This article will
discuss lost communications procedures in domestic airspace only, not
oceanic lost communications procedures, which are covered in
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) documents.

The Pilot/Controller
Glossary defines lost communications as follows: "Loss of the
ability to communicate by radio.Aircraft
are sometimes referred to as NORDO (No Radio).Standard pilot procedures are specified in 14 CFR Part 91.Radar controllers issue procedures for pilots to follow in the
event of lost communications during a radar approach when weather
reports indicate that an aircraft will likely encounter IFR weather
conditions during the approach."

The legal reference for
domestic lost communication procedures is title14, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Section 91.185, IFR operations: Two-way radio
communications failure.The
AIM does a good job at breaking down this regulation and explaining it
by way of examples and notes. AIM paragraphs 6-4-1b and c state that:
"Whether two-way communications failure constitutes an emergency
depends on the circumstances, and in any event, it is a determination
made by the pilot.14 CFR
Section 91.3(b) authorizes a pilot to deviate from any rule in Subparts
A and B to the extent required to meet an emergency.In the event of two-way radio communications failure, ATC
service will be provided on the basis that the pilot is operating in
accordance with 14 CFR Section 91.185."

14 CFR, section 91.185,
states: "Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each pilot who has
two-way radio communications failure when operating under IFR shall
comply with the rules of this section."It then differentiates between lost communications during visual
flight rules (VFR) conditions versus instrument flight rules (IFR)
conditions."If the
failure occurs in VFR conditions, or if VFR conditions are encountered
after the failure, each pilot shall continue the flight under VFR and
land as soon as practicable."The AIM has a clarifying note that states: "However, it is
not intended that the requirement to 'land as soon as practicable' be
construed to mean 'as soon as possible.'Pilots retain the prerogative of exercising their best judgment
and are not required to land at an unauthorized airport, at an airport
unsuitable for the type of aircraft flown, or to land only minutes short
of their intended destination."The courts clarified this for us by ruling that: "A pilot
may not take advantage of this rule to continue his IFR flight in VFR
conditions to an airport of his liking, bypassing other airports and
leaving air traffic guessing what he or she is going to do."

In a case before the
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), enforcement action was
taken against an airline transport pilot's certificate when the pilot
continued for approximately 25 minutes after losing his radios on an IFR
flight but in VFR conditions, and landed at his destination.The NTSB found that the pilot did not adequately explain why he
failed to land as soon as practicable, given that he passed several
suitable airports in good VFR conditions.

The regulation goes on to
explain the procedures for lost communications failure of an IFR flight
in IFR conditions with respect to route flown, altitude, and clearance
limit.

14 CFR, section 91.185,
states:

(1) Route.

(i.)By the route assigned in the last ATC clearance received;

(ii.)If being radar vectored, by the direct route from the point of
radio failure to the fix, route, or airway specified in the vector
clearance;

(iii.)In the absence of an assigned route, by the route that ATC has
advised may be expected in a further clearance; or

(iv.)In the absence of an assigned route or a route that ATC has
advised may be expected in a further clearance, by the route filed in
the flight plan.

(2) Altitude.At the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels
for theroute segment being flown: (emphasis added)

(i.)The altitude or fight level assigned in the last ATC clearance
received;

(iii.)The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a
further clearance.

(3) Leave clearance
limit.

(i.)When the clearance limit is a fix from which an approach begins,
commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the
expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or if one has
not been received, as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival
as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en
route.

(ii.)If the clearance limit is not a fix from which an approach
begins, leave the clearance limit at the expect-further-clearance time
if one has been received, or if none has been received, upon arrival
over the clearance limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach
begins and commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible
to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended
(with ATC) estimated time en route.

With the above rules in
mind, you can "what if" for practice.The AIM has several examples which are worth reviewing. (ATO-E)

/*T/ Pilot reports
continue to suggest the need to review the timing and relative
importance of taxi/turnoff instructions during the landing/rollout phase
of operation.FAAO 7110.65
has a general statement on this subject in paragraph 3-10-9, which
states: "Runway exiting or taxi instructions should not normally be
issued to an aircraft prior to, or immediately after, touchdown."The goal of this briefing item is to suggest factors for
controllers to consider in applying judgment to this situation.

Although there are no
hard and fast rules, there are some basic concepts which controllers can
use to judge the timeliness of such instructions.As an example, one major airline's standard for its pilots as to
when they may communicate with the controller after landing is whether
the aircraft is yet down to a "safe taxi speed."Rather than being a one-size-fits-all idea, this definition
attempts to leave room for the many factors which can vary based on type
of aircraft, location, and ambient conditions.

The mere fact that the
aircraft has touched down does not necessarily mean that the pilot's
workload has yet decreased.The
first part of the landing roll is often as critical as the approach and
flareout, at least until the aircraft is fully settled on the ground, no
longer making a significant amount of lift, and the pilot's focus has
shifted from stopping to taxiing.

This is not the same
speed for all aircraft, nor is it even always the same for a given
aircraft.Cross-winds
and/or gusty winds, visibility, runway braking action, runway length,
and day or night conditions are a few external variables, which can make
the landing roll more hazardous than might be thought at first glance
and thus influence the speed at which this landing-to-taxi transition is
completed.Additional
factors to consider include whether the turnoff to be used is a
high-speed or a 90-degree turn, how much room is available after the
turnoff, whether the aircraft needs to make an additional turn right
away, or if there is another runway/taxiway to cross.

In almost every phase of
their work, controllers are called upon to make judgment calls as to the
time-liness of their actions.Communications
during the landing/rollout phase of flight is one highly visible,
critical example of such a time.Awareness
of the factors which can influence this timeliness will make any
controller's work safer and more effective. (ATO-T)

/*TERF/ The NTSB
has issued numerous safety recommendations to the FAA to prevent runway
incursions and other airport surface incidents.One such recommendation was for controllers to speak at
reasonable rates when communicating with all flight crews, especially
those whose primary language is not English.In response to this recommendation, we will continually publish
the reminder in the Air Traffic Bulletin for controllers to speak at
reasonable rates when communicating with all flightcrews. (ATO-T)

/*T/ Operations
and restrictions for arrivals using intersecting runways seem
straightforward, but what about when the runways don't actually
intersect, yet their flight paths do?FAAO 7110.65 sets the requirements for controlling arriving
aircraft in these situations.

When the runways at your
airport don't intersect, but their flight paths do cross, treat your
runways as intersecting.As
stated in FAAO 7110.65, Paragraph 3-10-4, Intersecting Runway
Separation, the preceding aircraft must be clear of the landing runway
or must have completed landing roll and will hold short of
the intersection or flight path, or must have passed the intersection or
flight path before the second aircraft crosses the landing threshold or
the flight path of the preceding aircraft.This applies whether the aircraft involved are operating under
IFR or VFR.

Most aircraft will stop
or turn off the runway where we expect, but we can never assume anything
when it comes to safety.We
have to consider not only an aircraft's arrival flight path, but its
landing roll and possible go-around or missed approach procedure as
well.Keeping the overrun
and the departure corridor clear of other traffic until we have averted
any potential conflict will ensure safe landings on intersecting
runways. (ATO-T)

A cartoon character
named, Pogo, once exclaimed, "We have found the enemy and he is
us!"You can become
your own worst enemy by inadvertently adding to your own workload.A bad choice can create distractions and increase one's workload
in a hurry.The next few
examples were gleaned from reports of operational errors and deviations
in the system.Look
carefully at what each individual did or did not do that made the job
much more difficult.Perhaps this knowledge will help you or someone you train
avoid a similar mishap.

Example #1.

Deadwood, get rid of the
deadwood!How many times
have you told your student this or heard it yourself from your
instructor or supervisor?Deadwood
is unnecessary, old, stale, and useless information that clutters your
workspace or scope.Good
working practice is to remove such material as soon as it becomes
"deadwood."However, if the wood is still green, here is the
all-too-common scenario that can occur.

Several errors are on the
books that occurred because the controller stretched the deadwood issue
too far.In all of the
cases, the controller believed that the aircraft whose data tag was
deliberately dropped from the scope would be remembered.Here is a synopsis of how the situation goes.A busy controller hands off aircraft as soon as possible to stay
ahead of the game.As a
result, some aircraft are handed off and "frequency changed"
10 miles or so from the airspace boundary.The controller, no longer actively working the aircraft, drops
the data tag to get rid of clutter.The well-intentioned effort to keep one's mind and scope clear
sometimes works all too well.When a flight data tag is out of sight, all too often the
aircraft that it identified is forgotten.The result is that the next handoff, point out, or movement of
other aircraft within the controller's airspace is approved for movement
into/through the airspace or path of the handed off and forgotten
aircraft.FAAO 7110.65, Air
Traffic Control,Paragraph
5-3-8b, Target Markers, requires that flight data blocks continue to be
displayed on the controller's radar scope until the aircraft has exited
the sector or delegated airspace.Good
operating practice and requirements both exist to help you do your job
well and to keep you out of trouble.Don't make the mistake of undermining yourself.

Example #2.

The controller was
working local control.Traffic
was light with an arrival inbound but not yet in the traffic pattern.A departure was issued takeoff clearance.The controller then began counting and sorting the day's flight
progress strips.While the
controller was thus distracted, the two aircraft almost collided.Fortunately, the pilots saw each other in time to execute evasive
maneuvers.

What this normally conscientious and skillful controller did was create a distraction from the
primary duty which is stated in FAAO 7110.65, Air Traffic Control,
Paragraph 2-1-1, ATC Service."The
primary purpose of the ATC system is to prevent a collision between
aircraft operating in the system and to organize and expedite the flow
of traffic."This is a case of good people making bad choices.Do not be tempted into causing distractions from your primary
duty.The other duties can
be done when off-position or they can be delegated to another person who
is not on a control position.Keep
your priorities in order and do not deviate from that course.

Example #3.

A controller was working
alone in the tower cab while a second controller left for a quick break.It was late at night and traffic was slow.The controller positioned himself on the west side of the tower
cab because the active runway was 10L.The position held postings to remind the controller that one
of the parallel runways (10R) was closed for maintenance work.When the controller set up the workstation, the flight progress
strips were still being printed out on the east side of the cab.The controller did not switch the printing to the west side where
he was working.When strips
were printed, the controller had to leave his workstation to retrieve
the strips.During one of
those moments, an aircraft called for taxi.Since the controller was on the opposite side of the tower, he
chose to respond to the aircraft from the closest control position which
was located on the east side of the cab.The aircraft was quickly ready to go and the controller, still on
the east side of the cab, approved a request for a westbound runway
(28L) departure. The aircraft was cleared for takeoff and flew over the
men and equipment that were on the runway that was closed for
maintenance activities.

This controller set up a
double whammy for himself.The
distraction of having to leave his workstation to retrieve the flight
progress strips set up the secondary action of providing control
instructions from a position without the reminder data he needed to
prevent the use of a runway closed for maintenance.Remember, the workers on the ground depend on you just as much
as, if not more than, the pilots for good, safe information.Don't set yourself up by working without your tools at hand.

Example #4.

Any time you are faced
with an unusual situation, be very careful.In this example, a controller has continued to conduct business
as usual with an unusual situation in place that caused a routine day to
become much more complex in a hurry.

An aircraft had landed
gear up and was still on the runway.The controller was now faced with dealing with the gear up
landing and continuing operations on the other uninvolved runways.The controller was understandably busy, and decided to put an
aircraft into position on one of the runways.This choice illustrates a "business as usual" type
decision.Business was
decidedly not usual at the time and, when all was said and done, an
arrival aircraft flew over the holding aircraft and landed in front of
it.The 20-20 hindsight
message is to slow down and proceed with caution when you are faced with
unusual conditions.

The taxi into position
and hold procedure is a good procedure under most conditions.Be alert to conditions where this procedure should be used
with extreme caution or not at all.In other words, don't continue in a way that sets you up for
trouble! (AAT-200)